One of the benefits touted for US regulation is transparency. In the Epic Poker League Chapter 11 case we might see how far that goes, at least after the fact.

Will regulation and the involvement of licensed US casinos reult in insight into a poker industry company that owed $5,000,000 or so and had only $15,000 in cash at the end of February ?

For starters, there is an interesting group of creditors in the Chapter 11 case, which was filed in Maryland, including the US Attorney for the District of Maryland, Annie L. Duke, the Department of the Treasury, County tax collector for Montgomery County Maryland, Jeffrey Pollack, a prominent Nevada law firm or two I think, a prominent national commercial law firm, and the sellers of the Heartland Poker Tour.

For anyone who is owed money, there is a meeting of creditors set, the purpose of which is to examine the Debtor:

Meeting of Creditors. 341(a) meeting to be held on 03/26/2012 at 03:00 PM at 341 meeting room 6th Floor at 6305 Ivy Ln., Greenbelt. (Maryland)

Proof of Claim are due by 06/25/2012.

This raises legislation/regulatory issues, because regulation is sold on the basis of protecting players through judicial process, among other things. Here we have a well known, connected group who went almost $5,000,000 all in, on borrowed money while owing funds to at least one charity and a popular B&M poker tour.

The first issue is really the financial "leverage" allowed a poker operator to be running on empty while making promises/statements to industry stakeholders, including players.

A second issue is the puzzling practice of licensed b&m casinos to lend their name and players to "charity" tournaments on what might have been a "four-wall" basis. How did a licensed casino allow someone else to collect proceeds from a torunament meant for charity ?

As for "regulated charities", how did anyone allow a spend of $400,000 in added money to a prize pool without securing the charity cut of the fees generated ahead of payment to the FS&G guys ?